The Real News Network - Ron Paul on Gaza »
Posted By jovial 1 year, 1 month ago in Political News
Dr. Paul discusses the invasion of Gaza on January 3, 2009 and its implications for America.
Read Full Story at therealnews.com »
768 Views Share Story 51 Comments Report
Submitted By:
jovial
Grew up In Brooklyn. Joined the Navy in 1976 stayed in 10 years. Aircraft Electronics tech. Worked for Major Govt. contractor then settled in California ...
Other Related Articles: All »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 51 (view all)
-
63%
Spadecaller1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There are some points made that I can agree with; but the mistake that Ron Paul makes is ironic.
Reply
On one hand he states that we [U.S] should not be taking sides, and on the other hand he blames Israel for breaking the cease fire, which is misleading.
Israeli Security forces uncovered a tunnel intended for immediate use to abduct Israeli soldiers into the Gaza Strip.
In June 2006 Gaza gunmen snatched Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier, when they infiltrated through a tunnel under the border fence into an Israel army base bordering on the southern Gaza Strip. Shalit is still being held at a secret location.
Palestinian militants (Hamas) FIRED 37 mortar bombs at Israeli forces while they were attempting to destroy this tunnel.
This is the event that triggered the breaking of the ceasefire with Hamas on November 4, 2008.
Ron Paul's desire to withdraw support for Israel is not surprising to me.
Why did Paul accept campaign contributions from neo-Nazi leader Don Black ( among others), who heads an internet-based group called Stormfront?
Why is there so much neo-Nazi support for Ron Paul?
Among the neo-Nazi supporters for Rep. Paul was Will Williams (aka "White Will") a top Internet organizer and neo-Nazi leader and who was the southern coordinator for William Pierce's National Alliance Party, the largest neo-Nazi party in the U.S.
Williams spent 30 years as a racist activist, and was personally responsible for providing security services to William Pierce. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, in 1993, Williams targeted children for recruitment to the National Alliance, authoring and distributing a racist comic book called "The Saga of ... WHITE WILL" which featured a violent attack by the hero against a Jewish youngster.
In 1989 Pierce's publishing arm, National Vanguard Books, printed his second novel, Hunter, depicting the assassinations of interracial couples, Jews and politicians. The book is dedicated to Joseph Paul Franklin, convicted of the sniper murders of at least two black men.
On the 100th anniversary of Adolf Hitler's birth, Pierce editorialized that the Nazi leader was "the greatest man of our era."
And in 1995 Timothy McVeigh, aided by Army pal Terry Nichols, blows up the Oklahoma City federal building, killing 168 people. When McVeigh is arrested, police find excerpts from The Turner Diaries in his car, and phone records reveal McVeigh had called the National Alliance several times prior to the bombing.
Ten days after the attack, which is patterned on a similar bombing depicted in The Turner Diaries, Pierce predicts that resentment of Jews, minorities and others will lead to terrorism "on a scale the world has never seen before." Later in the year, the Alliance goes on-line with its own Web site.
When Paul was questioned about accepting money from leaders and members of the neo-Nazi party he did not deny it nor did he return the contributions.-
100%
jovial1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u39z38xjraw
Reply
There is a big question of whether Ron Paul actually said this things or was it some people that worked for him. I would like to see the words on youtube or some other source coming right out of his mouth, before I make a final determination. -
blablablaComment removed: Retracted by user
-
50%
kobzikov1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"There are some points made that I can agree with; but the mistake that Ron Paul makes is ironic.
Reply
On one hand he states that we [U.S] should not be taking sides, and on the other hand he blames Israel for breaking the cease fire, which is misleading."
Not really. When he says not taking sides he clearly means not helping either side, instead of refusal to take a stance on the issue. He is not talking about US refraining to evaluate the situation or facts on the ground that led to it. He is talking about remaining neutral.
"Palestinian militants (Hamas) FIRED 37 mortar bombs at Israeli forces while they were attempting to destroy this tunnel.
This is the event that triggered the breaking of the ceasefire with Hamas on November 4, 2008."
Since Israel never followed the ceasefire agreement that obligated it to lift the blockade Hamas had no reason to continue the ceasefire, so they let it expire. They offered Israel to extend the ceasefire on the condition that Israel would lift the blockade. Israel is not interested.
If Israel really wanted to keep the ceasefire going they could have negotiated with Hamas through Egyptian channels anytime after their incursion into Gaza, since they refuse to talk to them directly.
The genocidal raid known as Operation Cast Lead has been planned for months, which clearly indicates the intentions of Israeli government toward Gaza and its inhabitants.
"Ron Paul's desire to withdraw support for Israel is not surprising to me."
What I can't figure out is why is it relevant if Ron Paul is a racist? Regardless of whether he is or isn't one. Are you saying that he wants to cut off US aid to Israel because of his racism???
Shall we look at how he feels about US giving international aid in general? Or are you planning to chalk up his position on international aid to other countries to racism as well?
I can't say that I'm a big fan of Ron Paul, he is off on a lot of things including opposition to international aid. But withdrawing aid to the state that practices ethnic cleansing is not one of them. I agree with the position, even though I have relatives living in Israel, but I suggest ignoring that Spade and calling me a racist as well, even though it's as irrational. -
60%
hyperbola1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The trouble with that spin Spade is that it is simply not true. Let´s be clear that Israel violated the cease fire from day one - in fact, the Israelis NEVER complied with the cease fire. Here is an honest Israeli.
Reply
How Israel is Multiplying Hamas by a Thousand
Molten Lead in Gaza
...“ISRAEL MUST defend itself against the rockets that are terrorizing our Southern towns,” the Israeli spokesmen explained. “Palestinians must respond to the killing of their fighters inside the Gaza Strip,” the Hamas spokesmen declared.
As a matter of fact, the cease-fire did not collapse, because there was no real cease-fire to start with. The main requirement for any cease-fire in the Gaza Strip must be the opening of the border crossings. There can be no life in Gaza without a steady flow of supplies. But the crossings were not opened, except for a few hours now and again. The blockade on land, on sea and in the air against a million and a half human beings is an act of war, as much as any dropping of bombs or launching of rockets. It paralyzes life in the Gaza Strip: eliminating most sources of employment, pushing hundreds of thousands to the brink of starvation, stopping most hospitals from functioning, disrupting the supply of electricity and water.
Those who decided to close the crossings – under whatever pretext – knew that there is no real cease-fire under these conditions.
That is the main thing. Then there came the small provocations which were designed to get Hamas to react. After several months, in which hardly any Qassam rockets were launched, an army unit was sent into the Strip “in order to destroy a tunnel that came close to the border fence”. From a purely military point of view, it would have made more sense to lay an ambush on our side of the fence. But the aim was to find a pretext for the termination of the cease-fire, in a way that made it plausible to put the blame on the Palestinians. And indeed, after several such small actions, in which Hamas fighters were killed, Hamas retaliated with a massive launch of rockets, and – lo and behold – the cease-fire was at an end. Everybody blamed Hamas.
* * *
WHAT WAS THE AIM? Tzipi Livni announced it openly: to liquidate Hamas rule in Gaza. The Qassams served only as a pretext. -
100%
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
On this issue I am in total agreement with you. At the start of the video he messes up what was going on. He sys that Israel is attacking to prevent a problem that might come. That ignores the fact that from day 1 of the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, Hamas has sent rockets into Israel. There have been a few short stoppages but that is all. The border was closed after Gaza kept sending out suicide bombers and missiles and other weapons were found in medical supplies being trucked in.
Reply -
-
-
-
100%
jovial1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I've heard quite a few stories on him saying these things as well. Do you have a video of him actually saying these things? I will be the first to agree if I have proof he actually said any of those racial slurs. I'm not supporting Paul, but I would like to know if the support was mutual between the people that said these things and Ron Paul himself.
Reply -
50%
hyperbola1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There are real dangers of anti-semitism making a comeback in the US if we continue to allow zionists to trun our foreign policy. Americans jews should take the lead in getting rid of the zionists in our government, politics and media.
Reply
Bringing the Arab-Israeli War Home
... The American people should be livid, though, with their bipartisan political elite and the Israel-firsters at Commentary, the New York Times, National Review, the Weekly Standard, and the Washington Post, as well as that hive of anti-American U.S. citizens that fund and lead AIPAC, for involving them in this barbarous mess. At some point down the road, every U.S.-taxpayer-funded bomb, artillery shell, and bullet aimed at the Palestinians will yield Americans killed at the hands of al-Qaeda, its allies, or those it inspires in attacks launched in response to U.S. support for Israel. Those Americans will be killed because their political and media leaders – corrupted to the bone by AIPAC – have involved them in a religious war that threatens nothing vital to their country's principles or national security, their personal economic well-being, or their children's lives.
And worse is yet to come. Israel's Gaza invasion has produced an unusual number of public anti-Israel demonstrations by American Muslims around the United States. The 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war produced similar events, but the current, Gaza-focused demonstrations are angrier and larger in number. How long, one wonders, will it be before Israel's military actions lead to violent clashes in America?
If this occurs, Israel and its American supporters will have the insurance policy they desire above any other, one they are desperate to obtain before Israel takes harsh action – by forced deportation or other means – against its rapidly growing and radicalizing Arab population. Once the Arab-Israeli religious war has been brought into the United States and is producing blood in America's streets, the Israel-firsters will claim the carnage proves that secular America and theocratic Israel are in the same boat and facing the same enemies. Flogging this plausible but palpable lie, AIPAC-owned American leaders will consign this country to an unending war against Islam, the same catastrophe that is Israel's lot...
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/01/05/bringing... -
-
-
75%
Albmore1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I do not have a problem with much of what Ron Paul says, BUT I do have a few doubts. 1st what happened to all the campaign money he recieved. 2nd. If he was so strong in his beliefes why did he not run on the libertarian ticket? Why did he not start wistle blowing on the things he saw going on while in office?
Reply -
50%
Spadecaller1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I wonder how blablabla would dismiss this:
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de_CSuJCsfY=http://... -
50%
Spadecaller1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This an article written by Ron Paul in 1992:
Reply
"LOS ANGELES RACIAL TERRORISM"
Ron Paul:
>The criminals who terrorize our cities--in riots and on every
non-riot day--are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are.
As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to "fight the power," and to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible. Anything is justified against "The Man." And "The Woman.' A lady I know recently saw a black couple in the supermarket with a cute little girl, three years old or
so. My friend waved to the tiny child, who scowled, stuck out her tongue, and said (somewhat tautologically): "I hate you, white honkey." And the parents were indulgent. Is any white child taught to hate in this way? I've never heard of it. If a white child made such a remark to a black woman, the parents would stop it with a reprimand or a spank. But this is normal, and in fact benign, compared to much of the anti-white ideology in the thoroughly racist black community.
The black leadership indoctrinates its followers with phony history and phony theory to bolster its claims of victimology. Like the communists who renounced all that was bourgeois, the blacks reject all that is "Eurocentric."
They demand their own kind of thinking, and deny the possibility of non-blacks understanding it.>
I once was a supporter of Ron Paul. After learning more about him, my opinion of him changed, to say the least.-
-
40%
ecotourusa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I once was a supporter of Ron Paul. After learning more about him, my opinion of him changed, to say the least."
Reply
and o is better? (the mane who supports FISA and who voted for the billionaire bailout robbing our citizens)
spade, what happened to you? -
blablablaComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
50%
Spadecaller1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It seems that all it takes for a candidate to win progressive and truther hearts these days is to apologize for the terrorists and blame the whole thing on America. Ron Paul has developed an aggressive cult online dedicated to preaching his magnificence and trying to present him as a great scholar and a defender of the constitution. It's not true!
Reply
Ron Paul is a kook and a racist. Consider these comments about black people.
(Ron Paul black people)
Under the headline of “Terrorist Update,” for instance, Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, “If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.”
Paul, writing in his independent political newsletter in '92, reported about "unspecified" surveys of blacks. The con game:
“Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action,”Paul wrote.
He continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered “as decent people.” Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul added:
“Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.” What a racist!
Paul also wrote that although “we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.”
The the real Ron Paul hiding behind the curtain is a small time and small minded wacko and bigot.
He is far from the dragon slayer and defender of the people's rights – as his followers like to claim.
He’s just another packaged politician who got elected in a purely Republican district where no Democrat could have hoped to win.
Writing in the same publication, Paul expressed the popular idea that government should lower the age at which accused juvenile criminals can be prosecuted as adults.
He added, “We don’t think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That’s true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets ..."
Does an open minded person who is not a bigot really need to read more?-
33%
UncontrollableScaldingDiarrhea1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why do Liberals hate when people cite facts? Liberals we're not living in a theoretical world where just being nice to people will make the acquiese to your worldview.
Reply
How is it racist to point out statistics? Why do blacks get a pass for their behavior? They do commit crimes at a disproptionate rate. That's just how it is.
And don't worry, Liberals don't leave it at blacks. Hispancis get a pass too. Liberals tell us that family values don't stop at the Rio Grande, but where did MS-13 come from?
Go ask to be a substitue teacher for a class with a large group of black kids sitting in the back. Nine times out of ten you'll have to deal with cell phones and other disruptions. Guess where they come from? Jeremiah Wright told us that we needed to understand blacks, that they need to climb around like monkeys when they get a lesson. Did Obama need to do that? How about Bill Cosby?
Interview a lot of blacks for a position in your business. You'll be amazed how many long chains of candiates you find "spittin' eubonics" at you. Guess who? Again Bill Cosby warned them not to do that. Told them to speak English. Cosby is the exception, not the rule. And he knows it. You can hear it when he chastises the black community.
We do have a large portion of blacks who think that they are held down because of "The Man." After all, that's why Jackson wanted to "de-ball" Obama, because Obama cut down Jackson's platform off at the root. Jackson is going to have a tougher time shaking down another multi million dollar beer distributorship for his son. There's no excuses anymore, the glass ceiling is shattered.
Look, I'm glad a lot of people would like to believe that we live in this world where being nice to people will get everyone to sing Kum-By-Yah, but that's just not reality. Get out in the real world. Lower the crime rate where its disproportionate, then you can say you did something. -
33%
hyperbola1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well Spade, not so different from your insistence on supporting much more serious crimes against humanity by zionist racists in Palestine. You shouldn't cast too many stones unless you are free of "if its my tribe, it can't be wrong" racism. Given your pleas for morality and democracy, I feel certain you support these Israeli jews - don't you?
Reply
Why Israeli Anti-Zionists do not recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist as a Jewish state
In recent times, the demand has been raised, by representatives of the State of Israel, and by its supporters abroad, to recognize the State of Israel’s “right to exist as a Jewish state”. I am told that this demand is a debater's trick that was invented by Henry Kissinger several years ago. Be that as it may, what, if anything, is wrong with this demand?
If the goal is a negotiated peace agreement, or treaty, there is no need for recognition of “the right of the State of Israel to exist as a Jewish state”. If the goal is to sabotage the possibility of a negotiated agreement, this demand has been placed front and center. A couple of other examples, just to illustrate the preposterous nature of the demand: Has anyone ever asked the Catholics of Ireland to recognize the right of Ulster, or Northern Ireland, to exist as a “Protestant state”? Would we recognize the right of any state to exist as a “Hindu state”? As a “Muslim state”? Just to pose the question is to expose its nature.
But, maybe we are not talking about “Jewish state” as a state affiliated to the Jewish religion. Maybe we are talking about a state that is defined by the dominant ethnicity. In that case, the position does not get any better.
...we have had our fill of states whose raison d'etre is to preserve ethnic superiority and domination. One does not have to refer to the late unlamented “Aryan state”. Within recent memory, we had white-supremacist Rhodesia and apartheid South Africa. Whatever limits there are to analogies from and to these white supremacist regimes, we have learned that states that define themselves with reference to the domination of one ethnic group cannot claim legitimacy.
Israel and its allies insist that the Palestinian victims of Zionism must “recognize Israel as a Jewish state with a Jewish majority.” No one seems concerned about the fact that this ultimatum flies in the face of elementary democratic values regarding human equality and human rights. Israel’s backers seek to legitimize that which is illegitimate by any standard of democracy. -
blablablaComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
100%
Justice4All1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ron Paul was the only Republican candidate to oppose Bush's war in Iraq. He's one of the last of the true conservatives and has no neocon tendencies. But the special interests did not want him on the ticket. He's a true American and always puts America first.
Reply
If you want to know why the special interests will never let him run for president just do a Google search for "Ron Paul" and "JDL". -
50%
Spadecaller1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Justice4some:
Reply
Ron Paul is a "true American." That might be true for some who believe a true American is only white and Christian.
Because Ron Paul was the only Republican to oppose Bush's Iraq war (along with millions of other Americans and people around the world), we should ignore his racist ideology and his complicit conduct with neo-nazi supporters?
"He's one of the last of the true conservatives and has no neocon tendencies". A true conservative? His racist comments seem quite neoconservative to me. And if he is the last hope for the Republican party, you guys are in serious trouble. -
100%
onlyonesecret1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, In the many books that he has written the only time he talks about blacks is to praise Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and to condemn economic policies that he thinks are adversely affecting blacks. I don't think he has any racial or any other prejudices, He is so totally focused on principle.
Reply
Perhaps we should look at the motives of the people looking for the dirt on Dr. Paul.-
-
50%
Spadecaller1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
onlyonesecret
Reply
With all due respect my friend, how do you explain that for 10 years in his own publication he was writing racist comments and providing a vehicle for racist and anti-Semitic commentaries. I have posted some of them here. How do you addresss these?
why do you feel the need to cherry picking what you want to believe about him? Why don't you address the issues raised. here on this thread? Why would Paul accept money from leaders of the neo-Nazi party? Why did he not return those donations, when he discovered their source? Why would he write the articles about blacks as posted here? You can tout his books and other ideas, which I believe have value too, but if you lack the open mindedness and willingness to accept his mistakes and faults too, then you are being much more objective.
-
-
-
100%
jovial1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The points that Dr. Paul make are valid on most points. The U.S. will ultimately take the blame for this Gaza incursion. And like he said, " and rightly so". We armed Israel. Just recently we sent bunker buster bombs to Israel. We send money and other munitions. Did we really expect Israel to stockpile these weapons and not use them? The solution in the Middle East is to make it too costly for either side to attack each other. The course we have been taking is to let one country become much too strong. Power corrupts. The Israeli's know that there is not too much too lose by using a military solution. The outcome of our indirect assistance in this conflagration, will not be fully known for some time. Every President since I can remember has been working on this peace process in the Middle East. The U.S. has become frustrated and chose to use military pre-emptive war as a tool to settle these complicated matters. The Israeli's have watched and decided to mimic our tactics on their neighbors. The ramifications of this will be felt in even the other neighboring Arab countries that chose to sit this one out. I see the moderate Arab countries becoming more radical as a result.
Reply-
blablablaComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Shankari25Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
100%
ur-land-is-my-land1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ron Paul is a straight shooter from Texas who is not cowed nor is he intimidated by the israeli lobby in US , the most corruptive of whom is the AIPAC, American Israel Public Affair Committee .As the saying goes where ever zionists go the first thing that jumps out of the window is freedom of expression relating to anything that zionists and jewish extremists and israel do. Look at these miserable souls in US congress and Senate and even the president elect, they all have been cowed into silence by AIPAC and the only time they have anything to say about this savagery by israeli savages on totally defenseless Palestinians is to blame the victims. These representative have lost their soul, freedom of speech and courage all thanks to the corruptive power of the jewish lobby in US. This makes Ron Paul even more courageous to come out and call it like it is. America needs more Ron Paul's in order to preserve the culture of being land of free , and hopefully someday free from thuggery, intimidation and currptive power and influence of jewish lobby especially AIPAC
Reply
More News
Fox News Politics
Meghan McCain Blasts Tea Party Movement, Palin on 'The View'
Gibbs Scrawls Grocery List on Hand in Jab at Palin
$85 Billion Senate Jobs Bill to Include $15 Billion in Road Money
Rep. Dicks Top Contender for Defense Appropriations Seat Held by Murtha
Obama Pleads for Bipartisanship, Calls for End to 'Grandstanding'
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.